對第三人具有保護效力的合同與信賴責任－－以咨詢責任為中心

文章以咨詢責任為線索，討論了德國法上“對第三人具有保護效力的合同”制度和信賴責任制度的發展與演變。文章認為，合同法、侵權法與締約過失責任都可以在一定程度上對專家的咨詢責任進行調整。不過三種制度各有優劣。“對第三人具有保護效力的合同”制度在第三人與合同一方當事人具有親屬、勞動關系等特定聯系時，在邏輯上、法理上是合適的。2002年的債法修改中制定的第311條第3 款在一定程度上肯定了信賴責任理論，該條是處理某些類型的咨詢責任的新依據。該規定可以在很大程度上減輕“對第三人具有保護效力的合同”制度的壓力。侵權法是咨詢提供人和受咨詢人之間沒有合同關系或特定聯系時，受咨詢人所能獲得的惟一的救濟方式。

This paper deals with the liability out of advice or consulting with focus on the rules and theories of German law. To this subject, there are several solutions offered by German law: contract law solution, torts law solution and liability out of culpa in contrahendo, the solution between contract and torts. Each of these three solutions has its advantage and disadvantage. “Contract with protection power to the third party” (Vertrag mit Schutzwirkung für Dritter) is a convincing arrangement to handle with the situation in which the third party has some kinds of near relationships with one of the contract party. The newly codified § 311 III BGB partly confirms the highly controversial “reliance liability” ( Vertrauenshaftung), which will be helpfd to reduce the reasoning difficulties of “contract with protection power to the third party” on some types of Consulting liability. The German tort law is also a feasible solution to deal with the problem of consulting liability, though it is still difficult to circumvent the fairly strictly interpreted § 823 and § 826 BGB.